Rashid & Anor v Sharif & Anor

The historic brick wall was a party fence wall, not built entirely on the claimants’ land. The defendants committed a technical trespass by demolishing the party wall and rebuilding without following statutory procedures, but the trespass was modest. Damages in lieu of an injunction are appropriate.

Parties: Claimant/respondent: Mr Abdul Rashid; Claimant/respondent: Mrs Parveen Akhtar; Defendant/appellant: Mr Nadeem Ahmen Sharif; Defendant/appellant: Mrs Gulzar Sharif
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 31 March 2014
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome: Appeal allowed in part; injunction set aside; damages awarded for trespass; each party to bear own costs.
Legal Topics: Boundary Disputes, Trespass, Party Wall, Damages in Lieu of Injunction

Property Law Boundary Disputes Trespass Party Wall Damages in Lieu of Injunction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Mr Abdul Rashid

Claimant/respondent

Mrs Parveen Akhtar

Claimant/respondent

Mr Nadeem Ahmen Sharif

Defendant/appellant

Mrs Gulzar Sharif

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the defendants committed trespass by constructing a shed at the end of their garden on disputed land
2 Whether the defendants should be ordered to demolish the north wall of their shed
3 Ownership and legal status of the historic brick wall (boundary or party wall)

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; injunction set aside; damages awarded for trespass; each party to bear own costs.

Orders

Defendants’ counterclaim dismissed
Damages of £300 awarded to claimants in lieu of injunction